Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves fee-schedule changes and 5% water-rate increase; public-works hourly fee raised to $45
Summary
Weaverville approved fee-schedule ordinances for general, fire and water funds, adopting a $45 public-works hourly charge and a 5% domestic water-rate increase (per the town's water study); fee-schedule ordinances passed by voice vote.
At a June 8 town workshop, Weaverville council adopted changes to fee schedules for the general, fire and water funds and approved several water-fee updates staff said are needed to comply with state law and to reflect operational costs.
Staff explained several changes in the packet, including a symmetric rounding policy for cash transactions, updated fees for large records requests, clarified subdivision and zoning amendment fees to conform with North Carolina law, and changes to meter recheck and tampering-related charges. Council discussion focused on the public-works hourly personnel rate: staff proposed increasing that line to $35 per hour, and Council member Young urged raising it to $45 to better compensate for overtime incurred supporting events. Council instructed staff to adopt the $45 public-works rate as part of the fee-schedule ordinances.
On water rates, staff reported an emergency water rate of cost-of-production ($6.75 per 1,000 gallons in staff calculations) plus 10% for administration, and a planned 5% domestic water-rate increase consistent with a water study completed two years prior. Other water-side updates include renaming meter-tampering fees to "interfering with water appliances or meters" to align with North Carolina law, changes to flow-test and fire-line fees, and consolidation of irrigation rates.
Council voted by voice to adopt the fee-schedule ordinances as presented, with the public-works hourly rate adjusted to $45 and the water-fund schedule included; the audio record shows the motion carried on voice vote. The meeting record earlier shows one council member (Council member Nagel) had voted against the budget ordinance, but the fee-schedule motion carried without a recorded roll-call in the transcript.
Council asked staff to clarify costs and return with specifics where appropriate; staff noted some items will be implemented incrementally to avoid large one-year jumps in fees.
